gugy
Sep 14, 11:06 AM
Here we go again,
High expectations for another event.
Just take the event this week as a lesson.
Showtime, we got:
Movie Store
Update ipods
ITV.
All related to Itunes and audio video experience. That's why was called "Showtime"
Now we have a new event coming up at a Photokina, photographers event.
What should we expect?
Aperture update and maybe something else relate to Photographers needs.
That's all folks!
Stop dreaming about Iphone, Mac Book Pro etc. it won't happen.
MPB's will be update on a Tuesday just like the Imac was couple weeks back. No special event for that.
Iphone if happens will be either have their own event or at MWSF.
Then later people get upset with Apple and don't understand why. Reality check guys.
High expectations for another event.
Just take the event this week as a lesson.
Showtime, we got:
Movie Store
Update ipods
ITV.
All related to Itunes and audio video experience. That's why was called "Showtime"
Now we have a new event coming up at a Photokina, photographers event.
What should we expect?
Aperture update and maybe something else relate to Photographers needs.
That's all folks!
Stop dreaming about Iphone, Mac Book Pro etc. it won't happen.
MPB's will be update on a Tuesday just like the Imac was couple weeks back. No special event for that.
Iphone if happens will be either have their own event or at MWSF.
Then later people get upset with Apple and don't understand why. Reality check guys.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 12:01 PM
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
berkleeboy210
Aug 31, 09:50 PM
I was all set to buy one of the New Archos PVP's.... They are pretty sweet.
But knowing my previous buying luck, I'd buy it, then Apple would release the new vPod and movie store.
guess i'll hang on till the 12th.
But knowing my previous buying luck, I'd buy it, then Apple would release the new vPod and movie store.
guess i'll hang on till the 12th.
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 4, 10:17 PM
Anyone else notice that Elgato have now pulled their Eyehome media streaming device without a replacement? Anything to do with rumors of a rival device from Apple?
Rivalry or acquisition?
Rivalry or acquisition?
DavidLeblond
Aug 28, 01:31 PM
my cat has told me that there will be a 23" chin-less iMac with the new Core 2 Duo chips, 1gig std, wireless kbd and mouse std. Or he is just hungry - hard to tell just what he is saying but he has friends in high places (trees mostly)
still heres hoping he's spot on
I'm hoping he is too!
My cat told ME that there will be Merom based iMacs released tomorrow. That, or she wants fresh water. I'm not sure which.
still heres hoping he's spot on
I'm hoping he is too!
My cat told ME that there will be Merom based iMacs released tomorrow. That, or she wants fresh water. I'm not sure which.
Cougarcat
Apr 30, 03:30 PM
Because that huge base of thunderbolt based devices is overwhelming! :p
Gotta build the computers first for the devices to follow.
I have a newbie question.
I plan on moving onto MAC OS (from Windows 7) but I wanted to wait for Lion, but I'm also quite impatient since the iMac is perfect for me.
Being new to Apple computers, would I be able to use Lion (like an upgrade) when it comes out?
Yes. Traditionally OS X upgrades cost $129, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was $99 or $79 this time around. Apple has been dropping their software prices lately.
Gotta build the computers first for the devices to follow.
I have a newbie question.
I plan on moving onto MAC OS (from Windows 7) but I wanted to wait for Lion, but I'm also quite impatient since the iMac is perfect for me.
Being new to Apple computers, would I be able to use Lion (like an upgrade) when it comes out?
Yes. Traditionally OS X upgrades cost $129, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was $99 or $79 this time around. Apple has been dropping their software prices lately.
asxtb
Sep 5, 07:56 AM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
joeshell383
Sep 26, 09:36 AM
Do any of you whiners realize that Verizon is trying to start their own music service to compete with an "iTunes + iPhone". Go to the Verizon Wireless website and click on Call My Music. Cingular and T-Mobile USA have no such service.
alec
Oct 27, 03:31 PM
Environment? Ha. Move to France.
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 09:27 AM
There is no way in hell that they will introduce laptops at this event.
Period.
I agree. This isn't a big computer hardware event. This is why I'm banking on the this Tuesday, the 19th for C2D MBP's. I think.:)
Period.
I agree. This isn't a big computer hardware event. This is why I'm banking on the this Tuesday, the 19th for C2D MBP's. I think.:)
yellow
Apr 4, 12:33 PM
"Shooting To Wound" is purely a product of television, movies, and video games. In real situations where gunfire is exchanged, milliseconds count, and center mass until the target is down is the ONLY reality.
MagnusVonMagnum
Mar 18, 03:53 PM
Identity theft is not malware and it's not targeted at just Mac or Windows. It can be done without using computers at all. There is no antivirus software that can protect a computer from the user's own stupidity or gullibility.
If you said "not just" I might agree. But if you think keyboard capture code isn't being used for identity threat and/or want to lump anyone who has every run into such malware as "stupid" or "gullible" well my opinion of you just keeps dropping even lower. Perhaps I can interest you in some kryptonite Superman?
If you said "not just" I might agree. But if you think keyboard capture code isn't being used for identity threat and/or want to lump anyone who has every run into such malware as "stupid" or "gullible" well my opinion of you just keeps dropping even lower. Perhaps I can interest you in some kryptonite Superman?
Sol
Sep 9, 01:57 AM
Did a certain platform jumping red-cap wearing Italian plumber write the headline?
Mama mia! iMac Core 2 Duo Benchamarks!
Mama mia! iMac Core 2 Duo Benchamarks!
Frisco
Oct 12, 12:53 PM
So it's a red nano?
n/m had to fish the links. :)
http://www.t3.co.uk/__data/assets/image/413249/redipod_250.jpg
(not as illustrated)
These look like white iPods viewed through 3-D Glasses.
n/m had to fish the links. :)
http://www.t3.co.uk/__data/assets/image/413249/redipod_250.jpg
(not as illustrated)
These look like white iPods viewed through 3-D Glasses.
cmaier
Nov 13, 10:43 PM
You're absolutely right, which means, unless you OWN or LICENSE the icons from Apple, you can't use them. That's what copyright infringement means.
Not quite. There are at least two other options. Fair use, and exhaustion/implied license/first sale doctrine.
The use is almost certainly fair use, and Apple's rights may very well be exhausted under the first sale doctrine. It's a thorny question of law since there is nothing in the Mac OS license that makes it clear what you can do with those icons. Apple would have been better off putting something in the development agreement about not being able to use representations of Macs, etc. But they didn't.
So your argument is that since a court of law would find this to be copyright infringement, it's covered by the development agreement.
My opinion, as an I.P. lawyer, is that it's not at all clear that it's copyright infringement, that most people would think it probably isn't, and that therefore the development agreement does not at all clearly forbid this sort of thing.
P.S.: You're saying developers just need to read the agreement. I'm saying they need to read the agreement, go to law school, and guess how Apple will interpret the facts.
Not quite. There are at least two other options. Fair use, and exhaustion/implied license/first sale doctrine.
The use is almost certainly fair use, and Apple's rights may very well be exhausted under the first sale doctrine. It's a thorny question of law since there is nothing in the Mac OS license that makes it clear what you can do with those icons. Apple would have been better off putting something in the development agreement about not being able to use representations of Macs, etc. But they didn't.
So your argument is that since a court of law would find this to be copyright infringement, it's covered by the development agreement.
My opinion, as an I.P. lawyer, is that it's not at all clear that it's copyright infringement, that most people would think it probably isn't, and that therefore the development agreement does not at all clearly forbid this sort of thing.
P.S.: You're saying developers just need to read the agreement. I'm saying they need to read the agreement, go to law school, and guess how Apple will interpret the facts.
toddybody
Apr 30, 10:55 PM
1. Play doesn't mean it needs to be on max settings and max resolution, so I am correct the last 2 generation can run crisis and crisis 2 at minimum settings
at about a 1080p resolution, and minimum settings for crisis is still pretty amazing.
2. When you say "There is No Mac that can max crysis" .... are you excluding the 5870 mac pro?!
3. You are very similar to me.... however instead oh having a Mac and a Gaming PC rig, I have a gaming PC that is hackintoshed.
Let's agree to disagree about min settings being viable play;)
On your 5870 mention (which was a good card)...it's not going to allow max settings on that fancy cinema display (which I consider to be the staple of many pro owners...at least the ones I know personally). To me, a game should be played at native res, settings aside.
Not to distract from the original issue...Crysis is still a very relevant and great benchmark for current system test. BUT, last time I checked...this isn't a dictatorship:) stay well, glad to hear theres some hackintosh gamers out there in MR
at about a 1080p resolution, and minimum settings for crisis is still pretty amazing.
2. When you say "There is No Mac that can max crysis" .... are you excluding the 5870 mac pro?!
3. You are very similar to me.... however instead oh having a Mac and a Gaming PC rig, I have a gaming PC that is hackintoshed.
Let's agree to disagree about min settings being viable play;)
On your 5870 mention (which was a good card)...it's not going to allow max settings on that fancy cinema display (which I consider to be the staple of many pro owners...at least the ones I know personally). To me, a game should be played at native res, settings aside.
Not to distract from the original issue...Crysis is still a very relevant and great benchmark for current system test. BUT, last time I checked...this isn't a dictatorship:) stay well, glad to hear theres some hackintosh gamers out there in MR
iMacZealot
Sep 17, 07:48 PM
OK. hang on. back the f&6king truck up.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/servicePlansOptionsV2/FreeClearFairFlexiblePlans.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=1436723&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_SCID=ECOMM&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_PCode=None&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_cartState=group
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/servicePlansOptionsV2/FreeClearFairFlexiblePlans.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=1436723&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_SCID=ECOMM&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_PCode=None&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_cartState=group
Chundles
Oct 12, 01:20 PM
It's certainly better than an red, glossy 1G nano - hopefully it would have the proper matte, anodised finish of the current nanos rather than the glossy coating ColorWarePC use to do their custom iPods.
Not too bad though...
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/7410/picture1pc9.png
Not too bad though...
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/7410/picture1pc9.png
Peace
Sep 5, 04:46 PM
ok, just made a quick mockup of what i would like to see announced next week :cool:
http://users.pandora.be/blackbox/airport_video.png
and make shure it also works with video_ts folders and avi/divx files (maybe via a front row API for third party developers like VLC?) ;)
this would perfectly complement that itunes movie store
Only one problem with that..
You can already do it with iTunes sharing.Just have a Mini next to the TV.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
http://users.pandora.be/blackbox/airport_video.png
and make shure it also works with video_ts folders and avi/divx files (maybe via a front row API for third party developers like VLC?) ;)
this would perfectly complement that itunes movie store
Only one problem with that..
You can already do it with iTunes sharing.Just have a Mini next to the TV.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
MattSepeta
Apr 18, 04:00 PM
The very fact that employers think that employees "should" work even one minute more than what they are paid to is mind-boggling. Why should they "expect" that the employee will give his time willingly for no extra?
If they want the project manager to work past 5pm, they simply must pay. if they need him to come in on Saturday to work on that new addition to the project, they must pay. It would seem mighty pretentious of them to expect to not pay for work done.
If they want employees to work non-stop, PAY FOR IT. No one owes their employer a darn thing except exactly what is required in the job during the hours agreed upon.
See how that works?
edit: funny that the US is pretty much the ONLY developed country on earth where benefits are seen as egregious handouts if you are a typical rank and file worker. But, we're #1, right?
1. If you are on Salary, you contractually agreed to get the job done regardless of the typical "work week". If you don't want to work long hours, don't accept a salaried position.
2. I am just as whole-heartedly against forcing hourly employees to work unpaid overtime. That would be "theft" or "servitude". Totally different.
If they want the project manager to work past 5pm, they simply must pay. if they need him to come in on Saturday to work on that new addition to the project, they must pay. It would seem mighty pretentious of them to expect to not pay for work done.
If they want employees to work non-stop, PAY FOR IT. No one owes their employer a darn thing except exactly what is required in the job during the hours agreed upon.
See how that works?
edit: funny that the US is pretty much the ONLY developed country on earth where benefits are seen as egregious handouts if you are a typical rank and file worker. But, we're #1, right?
1. If you are on Salary, you contractually agreed to get the job done regardless of the typical "work week". If you don't want to work long hours, don't accept a salaried position.
2. I am just as whole-heartedly against forcing hourly employees to work unpaid overtime. That would be "theft" or "servitude". Totally different.
MattSepeta
Apr 18, 04:29 PM
Ooohhh. So being on a salary, even a measly one for a basic desk job, means you are now at your employers beck and call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, come hell or high water? Got it. So, if more work comes in and the amount you are given to do increases substantially, you just suck it up and work that many more hours because they won't hire more people for the extra work? That sounds like a pretty awful world...but pretty much what goes on. Too bad people like you manage to convince people it's how life should be.
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
bshort
Sep 14, 10:00 AM
New version of Aperture!.. Saweeet
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
Anti-Dust
Anti-shake
Shoots in a new Apple RAW format
eye tracking for focus
Spot metering
1/8000 shutter with 150,000 shutter life
Full weather sealing
Magnesium body
6fps (up to 25 raw frames)
Depth of Field Preview
Pop up flash
802.11 Wifi
GPS built in
Optional Battery Grip
Scrollwheel navigation for menu system
Apple iScreen Digital Image processor
64 Segment Metering and Spot Metering
Supports Compact Flash
You had me up until the magnesium body.
It would have to be made out of aluminium.
-B
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
Anti-Dust
Anti-shake
Shoots in a new Apple RAW format
eye tracking for focus
Spot metering
1/8000 shutter with 150,000 shutter life
Full weather sealing
Magnesium body
6fps (up to 25 raw frames)
Depth of Field Preview
Pop up flash
802.11 Wifi
GPS built in
Optional Battery Grip
Scrollwheel navigation for menu system
Apple iScreen Digital Image processor
64 Segment Metering and Spot Metering
Supports Compact Flash
You had me up until the magnesium body.
It would have to be made out of aluminium.
-B
archurban
Sep 19, 02:26 PM
it's good to hear. somebody compare with TV shows download for first week. but I think it's not the same as movies because TV is always near you to watch anytime. but movie. you should go to buy it at shop or online store like amazon, or rental. however watching movies on HBO or other channels is not the same. so TV shows increase more than movie. 125,000 download is fairly good. of course it will be grown up very fast.
I purchased two movies so far. hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. they are more than my expectation. near DVD quality. yeah, it is. it's hardly found the difference between ITS movie and DVD. they are just like TV shows which have no commercial. I like it. Special feature? hmm. I don't need. well, someone wants. but it't not a big deal.
I hope that I will see more studios distribution on ITS from next week. then see how many movies will be added before next year.
I purchased two movies so far. hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. they are more than my expectation. near DVD quality. yeah, it is. it's hardly found the difference between ITS movie and DVD. they are just like TV shows which have no commercial. I like it. Special feature? hmm. I don't need. well, someone wants. but it't not a big deal.
I hope that I will see more studios distribution on ITS from next week. then see how many movies will be added before next year.
